BludgerTrack: 52.0-48.0 to Labor

One new poll on voting intention and one on leadership ratings find the BludgerTrack poll aggregate maintaining its recent boring form.

The BludgerTrack poll aggregate has provided remarkably little excitement since it resumed two months ago, with the two-party preferred reading never moving more than a few fractions of a point away from 52-48 in favour of Labor, and the seat projections never changing at any stage, either in aggregate or at the state level. This week is no exception, the only new addition being a lightly weighted result from Essential Research. The Roy Morgan results that were reported in the previous post have been added to the leadership ratings, without effecting any change worth mentioning.


Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,330 comments on “BludgerTrack: 52.0-48.0 to Labor”

Comments Page 2 of 27
1 2 3 27
  1. There are plenty of potential service area jobs, not requiring high skill levels, but they must be sufficiently valued by society to get funded. e.g. many types of care, environmental management, energy transition to low carbon etc.
    Automation increases productivity, but the extra profits move towards big capital. This situation must be reversed otherwise society (and markets) will break down. Capitalists have known this for some time, and were among the first to suggest a living wage.

  2. 9NewsAdel: Adelaide to be bathed in green light tonight in celebration of the Paris Agreement coming into force.… #9News

  3. dtt:
    For the sake of Simon et all I will try to keep this short and dumbed down

    Could someone remind dtt that her quantity does not = quality?

    Plus, her feeble attempts at bitch slaps are nothing short of embarrassing, for HER, when you read the drivel she follows it up with.

    1. The ecnomy – the FU “grenade” of Michael Moore. Trump is Whelan the wrecker. Not expected to build but employed to wreck.

    Gee. That will really help the American Economy then. Let’s vote for this guy for President!

    Clinton is the painter who will plaster over the termite damage.

    This is just Grade A Numpty stuff. Hillary Clinton is the only candidate who actually has a plan to transition the American Economy away from the dead ends that Australia is also having to deal with now, and which Donald Trump wants to return the nation to. Until it dies and becomes subservient to other smarter economies.

    2. Immigration – Trump’s wall is EXACTLY the same as our boats policy. Labor and Liberal embrace with passion here. Why expect USA to be different.

    Earth to dtt: America is NOT an island. Australia IS. Therefore the Immigration policy has to be more nuanced than ours as a result. The Reverse Bantuisation and Israeliisation of America will not work. Unless there is allowed to be live firing from the guard towers atop the Wall to stop the immigrants from attempting to cross the border. That will be a pretty sight, won’t it!?!

    Not to mention the Concentration Camps Trump will have to build in every State of America to warehouse the ‘Illegal Immigrants’ that his Brown Shirts will round up for deportation. All 11 million of them.

    3. . Foreign Policy – While Trump is a nutter with no experience.

    And a numpty nutter like Trump WON’T make bad calls!?! How naive and simplistic in their understanding of a situation as complex as Foreign Policy can a person get!?!

    Clinton is sane but has ALWAYS made bad calls

    ‘ALWAYS’ Hmm. Funny but I thought that a) Barack Obama was President and made the final calls on matters of Foreign Policy and War, or not, during his time in Office. Also, I thought the calls to get Osama Bin Laden and go after ISIS, without American boots on the ground, was rather sophisticated and RIGHT.

    4. Race relations – this is a silent and nasty one – I am not sure how it plays out but I think it does matter.

    Yeah. Lets just say that, like Soledad O’Brien did yesterday in her critique of CNN, that we should just normalise White Supremacy again as an issue in the Presidential Election! Because that’s just what you are doing here by putting ‘Race Relations’ and what would surely result from it should Donald J. Drumpf, descendant of a White German emigre to America, become President!

    daretotread. Donald Trump is no Isolationist proto peacenik, compared to the Hawkish Clinton. He is a violent, fascistic nogoodnik!

  4. PpollingNumbers: National @morningconsult/politico Poll:

    Clinton 52 (+5)
    Trump 47

    Clinton 51 (+3)
    Trump 48…

    Last link includes this poll

  5. I read that lengthy story in the Monthly about the US election yesterday.

    One thing I got from it was that many of the Tumpsters don’t really know why they want to vote for Trump. They don’t expect answers or solutions, they just think the system is stuffed and the only way to unstuff it is to destroy it.

    It’s a little like religious fanaticism … even though the scripture is clearly illogical if not impossible to credit, adherents WANT to believe ‘just because’ it’ll make them feel better.

  6. Guytaur
    Yes oil and gas policy is certainly one of the factors ramping up tension between US and Russia. Mind you sending gas along a pipeline will always be cheaper than sending by tanker, so I would not over blow the extent to which US gas exports could replace those of Russia. It does of course mean that countries like Germany and Poland can stand up more firmly against Russia. Less true of the Mediterranean I suspect, as all those gas tankers travelling those narrow water ways may be problematic.

  7. Jeez. You have to laugh at this pathetic lying government …

    They are now claiming the MyGov website was brought down by the same type of non-existent DDoS attack that brought down the census. Both attacks just happened to occur at the very time of an expected user peak load, for which the system seemed unable to cope, but that of course is just a complete coincidence (those dastardly hackers!).

    This is becoming the digital age equivalent of “the dog ate me homework”.

    Where are these lying toads going to use this excuse next? Centrelink? eHealth? BOM?

  8. Jen
    Yes quite – hence my description of trump as “Whelan the wrecker.” The Trump people think the house is rotten and prefer to wreck because they cannot see restoration possible. Sort of like a national “grand design”

  9. DTT

    I think you missed the bit at the end about renewables. For countries paying the higher priced gas and oil from Russia thats important. That high price includes being blackmailed into supporting Russia. So renewable independent energy policy is far cheaper for them.

  10. political_alert: Shadow Treasurer @Bowenchris is in Cairns and will join @Curtis_Pitt_MP and Senator Anthony Chisholm for a doorstop at 10:15am #auspol

  11. A leading adviser to the Baird government’s proposed changes to native vegetation laws has quit in protest, warning the plans could lead to a doubling of broadscale land clearing in the state.

    Hugh Possingham, a Queensland University conservation biologist, submitted his resignation letter to Premier Mike Baird and key ministers, saying his advice and those from a panel he had sat on were being ignored.

    (The extent of wide-scale land clearing across NSW is revealed in the new documentary, Cultivating Murder.)

    Instead of improving the existing legislation, the new biodiversity conservation package due to be put to Parliament as soon as next week will enable farmers to clear hundreds of hectares a property without having to find equivalent areas of offsets to preserve biodiversity under so-called “equity codes”.

    “It’s not what we agreed to,” Professor Possingham told Fairfax Media. “If you increase the quantity and quality of land clearing, you increase the chances of extinction.”

  12. The chances of Labor getting the SA Senate seat aren’t as low as those of Trump winning California, but that’s about the ballpark.

    Let’s just be happy that with two near certain supporters of the Coalition out of action for the time being Labor and the Greens have more options for support to block Turnbull stupidity for a few months.

  13. NicholasDole: State Coroner Michael Barnes describes Phillip #Hughes’ death as “sad and violent” and highlights inherent dangers of game. @abcnewsSydney

  14. For those of you feeling a little uneasy about Nate Silver’s present findings the following may be of some comfort

    If you’re a Democrat, the FiveThirtyEight forecast is probably making you feel anxious right about now. Just last week, Nate Silver’s polls-only forecast gave Hillary Clinton an overwhelming 85 percent chance of winning. But as of Thursday morning, her odds have fallen down to 66.9 percent — suggesting that while Donald Trump is still the underdog, there’s a one-in-three shot he’ll end up the next president.

    Liberals have tried to comfort themselves with the knowledge that FiveThirtyEight is an outlier among the six major forecasts, and that the other five give Trump between a 16 percent and a sub-1 percent chance of winning. Furthermore, in a year when Clinton has long led the vast majority of polls both nationally and in contests where more than 270 electoral votes are at stake, critics have questioned the significance of the FiveThirtyEight model’s dramatic swings back and forth.

    But don’t dismiss Silver’s approach out of hand, or make the lazy criticism that he’s doing it all to drive traffic to his website. (After all, his model hasn’t changed much from 2008 and 2012, when FiveThirtyEight’s forecast was remarkably stable and essentially served as a comforting security blanket for nervous liberals.) Indeed, when you dig into FiveThirtyEight’s methodological choices, they’re perfectly defensible. The model’s reasons for its relative caution about the outcome make a whole lot of sense.

    We’ll never really know whether a particular forecast was correct or incorrect, since they’re all probabilistic, and they all suggest a Clinton win is the most likely outcome. And we should keep in mind that FiveThirtyEight’s forecast is an outlier among the models.

  15. The party being bankrupted today won’t effect the standing of their ticket back at the election. They don’t have official party standing in the Parliament anyway, and the Senator won’t have any responsibilities for the Party’s finances unless they’ve done something really stupid like personally guaranteed their debts.

    Most likely outcome is still just a casual vacancy filled by the Party’s nominee.
    Less likely outcome is the 2nd on the ticket being elected if Day is finally determined to have been ineligible to stand (arguable but by no means certain)
    Least likely outcome is McEwen being elected and that would basically rely on Day being found ineligible and then the 2nd FF candidate also being found to be ineligible probably on citizenship grounds (and no one has produced any evidence to support the contention she isn’t eligible).

    The odds of the last option are too small to be considering until at least after the HC makes a call on Day’s eligibility.

  16. One thing I find interesting in Silver’s map is that updated polling for Florida, for instance, had a tie and Clinton +3 … yet the model tipped Florida red.

    I’ve seen this with a few states, so it is obvious an overall shift is used to calculate state voting … even if the individual state doesn’t tip by itself. In an election where it state by state (like our electorates) that determines the outcome, I’d be intrigued to understand how they factor it in.

  17. NateSilver538: The now-cast held steady today at Clinton +3.0 instead of moving toward Trump. Maybe a sign that Comey stuff has been fully priced in. (2/

  18. “sad and violent”

    Violent? FMD has the turnip ever played the game, or even watched it? Sean Abbott is handy, but no where near frightening pace. Hughes would have had a harder time facing Starc in the nets at Pratten Park when they both played grade for Wests.

  19. InsidersABC: Our guest on Sunday is @billshortenmp On the panel: David Marr, Niki Savva & Tom Switzer. And look out for another @rabbitandcoffee special!

  20. Actually what the hell would happen if it was a causal vacancy but the party was unable to nominate a replacement due to being terminated via bankruptcy or other cause ? Is there some sort of precedent for that (like maybe an Independent being disqualified for some reason ?).

  21. On the panel: David Marr, Niki Savva & Tom Switzer.

    Why? Why does Insiders persist with these partisan panelists? It makes the program virtually unwatchable.

  22. Lizzie at top of page:
    [I confess I cannot follow the intricacies of 18C, except that if the RWNJs want it repealed, it must have virtue.]
    The article you link to and the facts of the case outlined in the article do not permit a proper judgment to be made on the importance of 18C.

    1. Who can trust the newspaper report of the alleged offensive comments? If all that was said and done by the 3 defendants is as was claimed in the article (and seemingly the worst of that is the subject of denial) there are likely to be good defences under s.18D as –
    Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:
    (b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest.

    The 3 impugned statements as reported are surely likely to have been made “reasonably and in good faith” in respect of a discussion in the public interest, namely whether non-indigenous students should be segregated from the indigenous IT centre.
    2. If it happens that some or all of the statements are accurately reported and are found to be in breach of s.18C and the judge does not exempt them under s.18D this is still no basis to conclude s.18C should be amended or repealed. Judges do make mistakes and appeal courts are there to correct them.
    3. If the judge throws out the claim for damages the libertarian argument that s.18C should be amended or repealed because the 3 students should never even have been exposed to the risk of such litigation is complete nonsense. Legal remedies for wrong-doing (such as libel laws or s.18C) are not impugned by the fact that such remedies may be misused. This might arise with any legal remedy and there are potential legal remedies for those who have been subjected to abuse of legal process.
    4. IMO the strongest argument FOR s.18C is that it increases freedom of speech, rather than limits it. Because of s.18C we can safely call Andrew Bolt a racist without fear of a successful libel suit.
    The same point was better expressed by Professor Stone of Melbourne Uni thus:

    “This irony deepens when one considers the common refrain amongst critics of s 18C (and the respondents in Eatock v Bolt in particular) that the complainants should have responded to the criticisms by defending themselves in public debate. This suggestion taps into an important idea in the political theory of freedom of speech that the victims of harms caused by speech ought to ‘speak back’, and that the ‘fitting remedy for evil counsels is good ones’.[73] The irony arises because, in effect, Bolt and the Herald and Weekly Times have themselves been subject to a certain kind of ‘speaking back’. They have not been required to apologise, to pay damages, or — crucially — to remove the material from the internet. The sum total in effect of the measure imposed on them is that the articles are labelled as having infringed the RDA.

    In other words, the remedy imposed in Eatock v Bolt was predominantly expressive rather than coercive. It neither required compensation nor imposed any other sanction on the respondents. Rather, the state signals its disapproval of the message conveyed — labelling it as contrary to the RDA — but does not prevent its communication. The state’s action is akin to the ‘speaking back’ that the respondents and their defenders encourage. Moreover, just as the respondents and their defenders encouraged the complainants in this case, if the respondents are troubled by being labelled in this way, they are, of course, able themselves to ‘speak back’. Therefore, one way to understand the effect of Eatock v Bolt is that it makes a contribution to the public debate about racial identity (labelling the particular contribution of Bolt as discriminatory), but does not prevent Bolt’s message from being heard.”


  23. That is an interesting question Elaugaufin, but I reckon that Jay would play it safe and if there was no party able to make a recommendation would just nominate Gichuhi so long as she was happy to accept. There’d be no Albert Field shenanigans from a Labor Premier (you would hope)

  24. daretotread @ #71 Friday, November 4, 2016 at 9:43 am

    Is this guy too far left for you lot?

    I’ve generally stopped reading your stuff, but the brevity of this post caught my eye (hint, hint!). So I looked at it, and found this …

    Former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, who famously told Colin Powell, “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about if we can’t use it,”

    … and we all know how well that turned out!

    Doesn’t it remind you at all of Trump saying almost exactly the same thing about nuclear weapons?

    Now remind me again who’s the biggest threat to world peace?

  25. [antonbruckner11 @ #27 Friday, November 4, 2016 at 8:08 am
    Elaugaufein – Trump has one huge advantage. HE IS NOT A POLITICIAN]

    Surely Trump became a politician the moment he entered the race to become the GOP’s nominee for president.

  26. @ Guytaur – I wouldn’t be so optimistic that FF will be disqualified.

    Some Panama based company will loan FF the money, their senator will be sworn in, their senator will quit the party and become an independent.

    The loaner will call the loan due, sending FF insolvent (and recovering much of their 1.5 M investment, as FF is not literally pennyless today). The FF senator then mysteriously comes out against a banking Royal Commission.

  27. If people in the coal mining areas of Virginia are voting for Trump, what abut the coal mining area of the Latrobe Valley where the stuff which comes out of the ground has provided work for thousands since the 1920s? Who should they vote for?
    Anyway, other than burn brown coal – not much better than peat in many instances, what do you do with the stuff? At one time they tried making gas from it – gave that away years ago – and, to top it off, it is been estimated there is enough of this stuff in the ground – heading in an easterly direction – to last for 200 years or some such.
    Just thought, in Ireland they use peaty water to make really good whisky. I just can’t see that happening with the water from the Latrobe river.
    I heard Chester bagging/blaming Labor for what is happening at Hazelwood as some kind of result of Rudd-Gillard wanting to tackle climate change. Never mind about that. He should just look at the brown gunk in the sky as he drives to his home in what ever part of MacMillan he lives in.

  28. Windhover

    The article you link to and the facts of the case outlined in the article do not permit a proper judgment to be made on the importance of 18C.

    Thank you. I thought it must be my lack of brain cells!

  29. Ratsak, its more to do with the targeting of Hughes on that day not the individual ball by the individual bowler.

    From what I understand, there were a ridiculous number of short balls bowled to Hughes in a short period. I worry the cricketers have closed ranks on the bowling tactics and what sledging that was going on. They claimed that no sledging happened – which, frankly, is unbelievable.

    This finding by the coroner is a lost opportunity.

  30. The ABC spends its money sending Uhlmann to West Virginia to tell us that people of depressed coal mining areas are voting for Trump.

    I find it amazing that people like that are so eager to vote for a man who transparently doesn’t give a shit about them.

Comments Page 2 of 27
1 2 3 27

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *